Because BUGs are difficult to reproduce, Tesla has the initiative, and the evidence is difficult to testify.
First, it is difficult to find and reproduce software bugs.
Software bugs are mostly probabilistic, and programmers who have done software development should be familiar with the difficulty of finding problems in Shishan. This leads to the fact that under normal conditions, the same situation may not be reproduced after dozens of tests or hundreds of times, but you cannot prove that it is not, and there is no way to prove that it is.
Second, Tesla has the initiative.
In nominal terms, the data is owned by the car owner, but the back-end data are all in the back-end of Tesla, and the information in the EDR can only be decrypted by Tesla, so there is a process in the process, whether the data has been processed, and no one supervises People can make it clear.
Or to be clear, Tesla wants to give to those who really want to give fakes, and the initiative is in his own control.
Third, and the most terrible, the evidence is hard to beat.
Taking into account the hardening of the brakes tested by several big Vs, at the moment of the incident, whether the car owner stepped on the brakes or not, data alone cannot prove it. Because even if the data shows that the brake pedal depth is 0, there is no way to figure out whether the brake is hardened and cannot be stepped on, or the owner has not stepped on it at all.
Ten thousand steps back, even if the time travels, the owner puts on the foot recorder, it can be proved that the foot is also on the brake pedal at the time of the incident, if the brake pedal depth data is 0, Tesla said that the owner just put his foot on the pedal but Without stepping on, this matter is also difficult to judge and hammer.
At this point, it is difficult to hold Tesla accountable in a single case, and the state must supervise it as soon as possible to prevent Rashomon from happening again and again.
No comments:
Post a Comment